Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Kofi W. Oppong
Based on 15 articles published since 2010
(Why 15 articles?)
||||

Between 2010 and 2020, K. Oppong wrote the following 15 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Review Diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults: A summary of guidelines from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2018

O'Reilly, Derek / Fou, Linyun / Hasler, Elise / Hawkins, James / O'Connell, Susan / Pelone, Ferruccio / Callaway, Mark / Campbell, Fiona / Capel, Margred / Charnley, Richard / Corrie, Pippa / Elliot, Dawn / Goodburn, Lesley / Jewell, Anna / Joharchi, Suzanne / McGeeney, Laura / Mukherjee, Somnath / Oppong, Kofi / Whelan, Phil / Primrose, John / Neoptolemos, John. ·Manchester Royal Infirmary, Central Manchester NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, United Kingdom. Electronic address: doreilly@doctors.org.uk. · National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, United Kingdom. · Bristol Royal Infirmary, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom. · University of Liverpool, The Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospital NHS Trust, United Kingdom. · George Thomas Hospice, United Kingdom. · Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. · Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. · Northumbria Healthcare Foundation Trust, United Kingdom. · Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Germany. · CRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford & Churchill Hospital, United Kingdom. · University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, United Kingdom. · University of Heidelberg, Germany. ·Pancreatology · Pubmed #30292643.

ABSTRACT: To enable standardisation of care of pancreatic cancer patients and facilitate improvement in outcome, the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults. Systematic literature searches, systematic review and meta-analyses were undertaken. Recommendations were drafted on the basis of the group's interpretation of the best available evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness. There was patient involvement and public consultation. Recommendations were made on: diagnosis; staging; monitoring of inherited high risk; psychological support; pain; nutrition management; and the specific management of people with resectable-, borderline-resectable- and unresectable-pancreatic cancer. The guideline committee also made recommendations for future research into neoadjuvant therapy, cachexia interventions, minimally invasive pancreatectomy, pain management and psychological support needs. These NICE guidelines aim to promote best current practice and support and stimulate research and innovation in pancreatic cancer.

2 Review What to do for the incidental pancreatic cystic lesion? 2014

Robinson, S M / Scott, J / Oppong, K W / White, S A. ·HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7DN, UK. Electronic address: s.m.robinson@ncl.ac.uk. · Radiology Department, Freeman Hospital, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7DN, UK. · HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7DN, UK. ·Surg Oncol · Pubmed #24846834.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Incidental pancreatic cysts are identified in 1% of all patients undergoing CT scans of the abdomen for whatever reason. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of the current evidence relating to the investigation and management of these lesions. METHODS: PubMed was searched to identify relevant studies relating to the investigation and management of incidentally discovered pancreatic cystic lesions. RESULTS: Initial investigation of incidentally discovered pancreatic cysts should be with either specific pancreas protocol CT or contrast enhanced MRI with MRCP. The diagnostic yield of these investigations can be increased with the addition of EUS/FNA and cyst fluid analysis in appropriately selected patients. Surgical intervention may be indicated in otherwise fit patients who are identified as having mucinous neoplasms. CONCLUSION: Applying a systematic approach to the investigation of incidentally discovered pancreatic cysts means that in the majority of cases cyst aetiology can be accurately determined and appropriate management plans developed.

3 Clinical Trial Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative EUS elastography for discriminating malignant from benign solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, single-center study. 2012

Dawwas, Muhammad F / Taha, Hatim / Leeds, John S / Nayar, Manu K / Oppong, Kofi W. ·Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. ·Gastrointest Endosc · Pubmed #22854060.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Recent data suggest that quantitative EUS elastography, a novel technique that allows real-time quantification of tissue stiffness, can accurately differentiate malignant from benign solid pancreatic masses. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the diagnostic utility of this technique in an independent cohort. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective, single-center study. PATIENTS, INTERVENTIONS, AND METHODS: A total of 104 patients with evidence of a solid pancreatic mass on cross-sectional imaging and/or endosonography underwent 111 quantitative EUS elastography procedures. Multiple elastographic measurements of the mass lesion and soft-tissue reference areas were undertaken, and the corresponding strain ratios (SRs) were calculated. The final diagnosis was based on pancreatic cytology or histology. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall accuracy of quantitative EUS elastography for discriminating malignant from benign pancreatic masses. RESULTS: The final diagnoses were primary pancreatic carcinoma (71.2%), neuroendocrine tumor (10.6%), metastatic cancer (1.9%), and pancreatitis (16.3%). Malignant masses had a higher SR (P = .01) and lower mass elasticity (P = .003) than inflammatory ones. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for the detection of pancreatic malignancy of both SR and mass elasticity (0.69 and 0.72, respectively) were less favorable than reported recently. At the cut points providing the highest accuracy in this cohort (4.65 for SR and 0.27% for mass elasticity), quantitative EUS elastography had a sensitivity of 100.0% and 95.7%, specificity of 16.7% and 22.2%, positive predictive value of 86.1% and 86.4%, negative predictive value of 100.0% and 50.0%, and overall accuracy of 86.5% and 83.8%, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Relatively small number of patients with benign disease. CONCLUSION: In the largest single-center study to date, the diagnostic utility of quantitative EUS elastography for discriminating pancreatic masses was modest, suggesting that it may only supplement rather than supplant the role of pancreatic tissue sampling in the future.

4 Article Changes in tumor vascularity depicted by contrast-enhanced EUS as a predictor of prognosis and treatment efficacy in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer (PEACE): A study protocol. 2019

Sãftoiu, Adrian / Bhutani, Manoop S / Itoi, Takao / Arcidiacono, Paolo G / Bories, Erwan / Cazacu, Irina M / Constantin, Alina / Coronel, Emmanuel / Dietrich, Christoph F / Duda, Dan G / Garcia, Julio Iglesias / Hocke, Michael / Ignee, Andre / Jenssen, Christian / Jinga, Mariana / Khor, Christopher / Oppong, Kofi W / Pereira, Stephen / Petrone, Maria Chiara / Santo, Erwin / Seicean, Andrada / Seo, Dong Wan / Siyu, Sun / Vilmann, Peter / Waxman, Irving / Yeaton, Paul. ·Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Craiova, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Craiova, Craiova, Romania. · Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA. · Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan. · Pancreato-Biliary Endoscopy and Endosonography Division, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita Salute San Raffaele University Milan, Milan, Italy. · Endoscopy Unit, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France. · Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Craiova, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Craiova, Craiova, Romania; Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA, USA. · Department of Gastroenterology, Ponderas Academic Hospital, Bucharest, Romania. · Medical Department, Caritas-Krankenhaus, Uhlandstr 7, D-97980 Bad Mergentheim, Germany. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Santiago de Compostella, Santiago, Spain. · Department of Gastroenterology, Helios Kliniken Meiningen, Meiningen, Germany. · Department of Internal Medicine, Krankenhaus Maerkisch-Oderland, D-15344 Strausberg and Brandenburg Institute of Clinical Ultrasound at Medical University Brandenburg, Germany. · Department of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical Emergency Military Hospital Dr. Carol Davila, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, Bucharest, Romania. · Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore. · HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, London, UK. · University College London Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Royal Free Hospital Campus, London, UK. · Tel Aviv Souraski Medical Center, Invasive Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Institute, Tel Aviv, Israel. · Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy "Iuliu Hațieganu," Cluj-Napoca, Romania. · Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea. · Endoscopy Center, Liaoning Engineering Technology Research Center of Diagnosis and Treatment of Digestive Endoscopy, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. · Gastrointestinal Unit, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Herlev, Denmark. · Center for Endoscopic Research and Therapeutics, University of Chicago Medicine and Biological Sciences, Chicago, IL, USA. · Carilion Clinic Roanoke, Roanoke, USA. ·Endosc Ultrasound · Pubmed #31249159.

ABSTRACT: Patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer have a poor prognosis. The analysis of prognostic factors before treatment may be helpful in determining the best therapeutic strategies. The aim of the PEACE study is to assess the vascularity of pancreatic malignant tumors using contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CEH-EUS) and to clarify the prognostic value of tumor vascularity in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. Hereby, we present the protocol of a prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm, multicenter study aiming to assess changes in tumor vascularity using CEH-EUS before and 2 months after treatment initiation in patients with unresectable, locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer and to examine the correlation between vascular changes and treatment response, progression-free survival, and overall survival.

5 Article Comparison of the diagnostic performance of 2 core biopsy needles for EUS-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic lesions. 2017

Nayar, Manu K / Paranandi, Bharat / Dawwas, Muhammad F / Leeds, John S / Darne, Antony / Haugk, Beate / Majumdar, Debasis / Ahmed, Muna M / Oppong, Kofi W. ·HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom. · HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom; Department of Cellular Pathology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom. · Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Kentucky Medical Center, Lexington, Kentucky, USA. ·Gastrointest Endosc · Pubmed #27633157.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A new core biopsy needle with a novel tip, opposing bevel, and sheath design has recently been introduced for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). The diagnostic utility of this needle for differentiating solid pancreatic masses is currently unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance and yield for tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic lesions of the opposing bevel needle with those of a reverse bevel EUS-FNB needle. METHODS: Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses undergoing EUS-FNB using the opposing bevel (n = 101) and the reverse bevel (n = 100) core biopsy needles were included in the study. Final diagnosis was based on positive histology or at least 12 months of follow-up in cases with a negative biopsy. The primary outcome was the diagnostic performance of the 2 needles for malignant pancreatic masses. A secondary outcome was the diagnostic yield. RESULTS: Compared with the reverse bevel needle, using strict criteria the opposing bevel needle provided significantly higher sensitivity (71.1% vs 90.1%; P = .0006) and overall accuracy (74% vs 92%; I = 0.0006) for discriminating malignant from benign solid pancreatic masses. The proportion of samples classified as adequate for histologic analysis was 87% for the reverse bevel needle versus 99% for the opposing bevel needle (p = 0.002) Multivariate analysis controlling the needle gauge and site did not show any significant difference in accuracy and sensitivity between the 2 groups. There were no adverse events in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In this first, large, single-center preliminary cohort study, an EUS core biopsy needle with a novel tip, opposing bevel, and sheath design afforded substantially superior tissue yield and diagnostic performance compared with a reverse-bevel needle. If replicated by randomized controlled trials, our findings suggest that similarly designed needles could become the standard of care for EUS-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic masses.

6 Article Serous cystic neoplasm of the pancreas: a multinational study of 2622 patients under the auspices of the International Association of Pancreatology and European Pancreatic Club (European Study Group on Cystic Tumors of the Pancreas). 2016

Jais, B / Rebours, V / Malleo, G / Salvia, R / Fontana, M / Maggino, L / Bassi, C / Manfredi, R / Moran, R / Lennon, A M / Zaheer, A / Wolfgang, C / Hruban, R / Marchegiani, G / Fernández Del Castillo, C / Brugge, W / Ha, Y / Kim, M H / Oh, D / Hirai, I / Kimura, W / Jang, J Y / Kim, S W / Jung, W / Kang, H / Song, S Y / Kang, C M / Lee, W J / Crippa, S / Falconi, M / Gomatos, I / Neoptolemos, J / Milanetto, A C / Sperti, C / Ricci, C / Casadei, R / Bissolati, M / Balzano, G / Frigerio, I / Girelli, R / Delhaye, M / Bernier, B / Wang, H / Jang, K T / Song, D H / Huggett, M T / Oppong, K W / Pererva, L / Kopchak, K V / Del Chiaro, M / Segersvard, R / Lee, L S / Conwell, D / Osvaldt, A / Campos, V / Aguero Garcete, G / Napoleon, B / Matsumoto, I / Shinzeki, M / Bolado, F / Fernandez, J M Urman / Keane, M G / Pereira, S P / Acuna, I Araujo / Vaquero, E C / Angiolini, M R / Zerbi, A / Tang, J / Leong, R W / Faccinetto, A / Morana, G / Petrone, M C / Arcidiacono, P G / Moon, J H / Choi, H J / Gill, R S / Pavey, D / Ouaïssi, M / Sastre, B / Spandre, M / De Angelis, C G / Rios-Vives, M A / Concepcion-Martin, M / Ikeura, T / Okazaki, K / Frulloni, L / Messina, O / Lévy, P. ·Department of Gastroenterology and Pancreatology, Beaujon Hospital, AP-HP, Clichy, France. · The Pancreas Institute, G.B. Rossi Hospital, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Division of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Department of Pathology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. · Departments of Surgery and Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. · First Department of Surgery, Yamagata University Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata, Japan. · Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. · Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. · Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Pancreaticobiliary Cancer Clinic, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea. · Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Polytechnic University of Marche Region, Ancona-Torrette, Italy. · NIHR Pancreas Biomedical Research Unit, Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, 3rd Surgical Clinic, University of Padua, Padua, Italy. · Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studiorum-University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy. · Pancreatic Surgery Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. · Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Italy. · Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatopancreatology and GI Oncology, Erasme University Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. · Institute of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China. · Department of Pathology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. · Department of Pathology, Gyeongsang National University School of Medicine, Jinju, Korea. · Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · National Institute of Surgery and Transplantology named after Shalimov, Kiev, Ukraine. · Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet at Center for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. · Division of Gastroenterology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. · Hôpital Privé Mermoz, Gastroentérologie, Lyon, France. · Division of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan. · Gastroenterology Department, Hospital de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. · Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University College Hospital, London, UK. · Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clinic, CIBEREHD, IDIBAPS, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. · Gastroenterology and Liver Services, Concord Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. · Radiological Department, General Hospital Cá Foncello, Treviso, Italy. · Division of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. · Department of Internal Medicine, Digestive Disease Center and Research Institute, SoonChunHyang University School of Medicine, Bucheon, Korea. · Department of Gastroenterology, Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital, Bankstown, New South Wales, Australia. · Department of Digestive Surgery, Timone Hospital, Marseille, France. · Gastrohepatology Department, San Giovanni Battista Molinette Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. · Gastroenterology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Institut de Reçerca-IIB Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · The Third Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan. · Department of Medicine, Pancreas Center, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. ·Gut · Pubmed #26045140.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Serous cystic neoplasm (SCN) is a cystic neoplasm of the pancreas whose natural history is poorly known. The purpose of the study was to attempt to describe the natural history of SCN, including the specific mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective multinational study including SCN diagnosed between 1990 and 2014. RESULTS: 2622 patients were included. Seventy-four per cent were women, and median age at diagnosis was 58 years (16-99). Patients presented with non-specific abdominal pain (27%), pancreaticobiliary symptoms (9%), diabetes mellitus (5%), other symptoms (4%) and/or were asymptomatic (61%). Fifty-two per cent of patients were operated on during the first year after diagnosis (median size: 40 mm (2-200)), 9% had resection beyond 1 year of follow-up (3 years (1-20), size at diagnosis: 25 mm (4-140)) and 39% had no surgery (3.6 years (1-23), 25.5 mm (1-200)). Surgical indications were (not exclusive) uncertain diagnosis (60%), symptoms (23%), size increase (12%), large size (6%) and adjacent organ compression (5%). In patients followed beyond 1 year (n=1271), size increased in 37% (growth rate: 4 mm/year), was stable in 57% and decreased in 6%. Three serous cystadenocarcinomas were recorded. Postoperative mortality was 0.6% (n=10), and SCN's related mortality was 0.1% (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: After a 3-year follow-up, clinical relevant symptoms occurred in a very small proportion of patients and size slowly increased in less than half. Surgical treatment should be proposed only for diagnosis remaining uncertain after complete workup, significant and related symptoms or exceptionally when exists concern with malignancy. This study supports an initial conservative management in the majority of patients with SCN. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: IRB 00006477.

7 Article EUS and EUS-FNA diagnosis of suspected pancreatic cystic neoplasms: Is the sum of the parts greater than the CEA? 2015

Oppong, K W / Dawwas, M F / Charnley, R M / Wadehra, V / Elamin, K / White, S / Nayar, M. ·HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Department of Gastroenterology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. Electronic address: Kofi.oppong@nuth.nhs.uk. · HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Department of Gastroenterology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Department of Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · Department of Cellular Pathology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. ·Pancreatology · Pubmed #26375415.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is suggested as the single most useful EUS/EUS-FNA derived test for the diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cysts. STUDY AIMS: To investigate the yield and diagnostic performance of EUS/EUS-FNA on an intention to diagnose basis and to determine the utility of the recommended CEA and amylase cut-off values. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of a prospectively maintained database of 433 procedures performed in a 10 year period. Diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA was determined in 133 procedures with a definite diagnosis. RESULTS: CEA value was determined in significantly fewer procedures (58.6%) than EUS diagnosis was stated (83.4%; p < 0.0001), cyst fluid appearance recorded (89.4%) or adequate sample for cytology obtained (76.7%; p < 0.005). Median CEA was significantly higher in mucinous cysts than non-mucinous (175 ng/ml vs 3 ng/ml, p < 0.0001) and in malignant cysts compared to benign (8945 ng/ml vs 93 ng/ml, p < 0.001). On an intention-to-diagnose analysis, a CEA cut-off of 110 ng/ml was significantly less accurate (42.8%) than EUS diagnosis (67.7%), cytology (58.6%) or aspirate appearance (66.9%; p < 0.05 for all comparisons). However, the combination of EUS diagnosis, cytology and CEA provided higher sensitivity (91%), specificity (75%) and accuracy (85.7%) than each component test alone (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Median amylase was significantly higher in benign compared to high-risk mucinous cysts ((11,429IU/L vs. 113IU/L; p < 0.05. CONCLUSION: The combination of EUS, cytology and CEA performed well. Malignant cysts had a higher CEA value than benign cysts. On an intention to diagnose basis a CEA cut-off of 110 ng/ml performed poorly.

8 Article Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)/endoscopic ultrasound--fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) cytology in solid and cystic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. 2015

Mitra, Vikramjit / Nayar, Manu K / Leeds, John S / Wadehra, Viney / Haugk, Beate / Scott, John / Charnley, Richard M / Oppong, Kofi W. ·HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, UK. · Department of Cellular Pathology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle, UK. · Department of Radiology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, UK. · HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, UK. kofi.oppong@nuth.nhs.uk. ·J Gastrointestin Liver Dis · Pubmed #25822436.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Our study aimed to assess the sensitivity of EUS and EUS-FNA for pancreatic neuro-endocrine tumors (pNETs) and compare performance over two consecutive 4 year 2 month periods, to investigate the comparative performance between solid and cystic pNETs and determine the incremental yield of EUS +/- FNA in individuals with a mass not diagnosed as a pNET after cross-sectional imaging. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was carried out to identify all pNET patients who underwent EUS-FNA between April 2003 and September 2011. RESULTS: A final diagnosis of solid and cystic pNETs was made in 43 and 10 patients, respectively. Overall, the yield of combined EUS imaging and cytology was significantly higher than that of CT and/or MRI (p< 0.05) across all groups [solid (83.7% vs. 41.8%), cystic (70% vs. 10%) and combined solid-cystic (81.1% vs. 35.8%)]. The yield of combined EUS imaging and cytology was significantly better than EUS imaging alone (p<0.05) in the solid (83.7% vs. 58%) and combined pNET cohort (81.1% vs. 52.8%) of patients. After a non-diagnostic CT and or MRI, EUS/EUS-FNA confirmed pNET in 19 out of 25 patients (76.0%) with solid pNETs and 6 out of 9 patients (66.7%) with cystic pNETs. CONCLUSION: EUS and EUS-FNA had a significant clinical impact in the 25/34 of cases where pNET was not suspected after initial cross-sectional imaging.

9 Article Autoimmune pancreatitis - diagnosis, management and longterm follow-up. 2014

Chatterjee, Suvadip / Oppong, Kofi W / Scott, John S / Jones, Dave E / Charnley, Richard M / Manas, Derek M / Jaques, Byron C / White, Steve A / French, Jeremy J / Sen, Gourab S / Haugk, Beate / Nayar, Manu K. ·HPB Unit Freeman Hospital Newcastle-upon-Tyne United Kingdom. Manu.Nayar@nuth.nhs.uk. · HPB Unit Freeman Hospital Newcastle-upon-Tyne United Kingdom. ·J Gastrointestin Liver Dis · Pubmed #24949610.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND & AIMS: Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a fibroinflammatory condition affecting the pancreas and could present as a multisystem disorder. Diagnosis and management can pose a diagnostic challenge in certain groups of patients. We report our experience of managing this condition in a tertiary pancreaticobiliary centre in the North East of England. METHODS: Patients were identified from a prospectively maintained database of patients diagnosed with AIP between 2005 and 2013. Diagnosis of definite/probable AIP was based on the revised HISORt criteria. When indicated, patients were treated with steroids and relapses were treated with azathioprine. All patients have been followed up to date. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were diagnosed with AIP during this period. All patients had pancreatic protocol CT performed while some patients had either MR or EUS as part of the work up. Fourteen out of 22 (64%) had an elevated IgG4 level (mean: 10.9 g/L; range 3.4 - 31 g/L). Four (18%) patients underwent surgery. Extrapancreatic involvement was seen in 15 (68%) patients, with biliary involvement being the commonest. Nineteen (86%) were treated with steroids and five (23%) required further immunosuppression for treatment of relapses. The mean follow up period was 36.94 months (range 7 - 94). CONCLUSION: Autoimmune pancreatitis is being increasingly recognized in the British population. Extrapancreatic involvement, particularly extrahepatic biliary involvement seems to be a frequent feature. Diagnosis should be based on accepted criteria as this significantly reduces the chances of overlooking malignancy. Awareness of this relatively rare condition and a multi-disciplinary team approach will help us to diagnose and treat this condition more effectively thereby reducing unnecessary interventions.

10 Article Does on-site adequacy assessment by cytotechnologists improve results of EUS guided FNA of solid pancreaticobiliary lesions? 2013

Nayar, Manu K / Chatterjee, Suvadip / Wadehra, Viney / Cunningham, Joanne / Leeds, John / Oppong, Kofi. ·HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. manu.nayar@nuth.nhs.uk ·JOP · Pubmed #23306334.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT: Rapid onsite adequacy assessment is stated to improve the diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to establish if the introduction of adequacy assessment performed by a biomedical scientist (cytotechnologist) to an established EUS service improved the diagnostic accuracy of EUS guided FNA of solid pancreaticobiliary lesions. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: This retrospective study includes all patients with solid pancreaticobiliary lesions who underwent EUS-FNA from April 2009 to September 2010. An in room cytotechnologist was present for 2 out of the 4 weekly EUS lists and therefore there were two groups identified: Group 1, cytotechnologist absent; and Group 2, cytotechnologist present. RESULTS: There were 82 patients in Group 1 and 97 patients in Group 2. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of passes (4.1 vs. 4.3), the inadequate aspirate rate (7.3% vs. 5.1%) or the mean size of the lesions (34.7 vs. 32.6 mm) between the groups. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value in Group 1 were 89%, 88%, 100%, 100% and 50% respectively. The results in Group 2 were 91%, 90%, 100%, 100% and 69% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study the adequacy assessment performed by a cytotechnologist did not improve the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA. In an established EUS-FNA service with low inadequate aspirate rates, onsite adequacy assessment may not improve results of the test.

11 Article Endobronchial ultrasonic videoscope for transgastric/transesophageal fine-needle aspiration in special situations: another tool for the gastrointestinal endosonographer. 2012

Chatterjee, S / Oppong, K W. ·Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. suvadip_chatterjee@yahoo.com ·Endoscopy · Pubmed #22933264.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

12 Article Diagnostic and therapeutic utility of single-operator peroral cholangioscopy for indeterminate biliary lesions and bile duct stones. 2012

Kalaitzakis, Evangelos / Webster, George J / Oppong, Kofi W / Kallis, Yiannis / Vlavianos, Panagiotis / Huggett, Matthew / Dawwas, Muhammad F / Lekharaju, Venkata / Hatfield, Adrian / Westaby, David / Sturgess, Richard. ·Digestive Diseases Unit, Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, UK. ·Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol · Pubmed #22433791.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND AIM: We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of single-operator peroral cholangioscopy (SOC) for indeterminate biliary lesions and its usefulness in electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) of biliary stones not amenable to conventional endoscopic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing SpyGlass SOC in four UK tertiary centres between 2008 and 2010 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were followed up until death or the last clinic visit until May 2011. The operating characteristics of SOC for detecting malignant lesions and the stone clearance rate after SOC-guided EHL were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients underwent 179 SOC procedures. Sixty-six percent were referred for indeterminate biliary strictures, 13% for filling defects and 21% for SOC-guided EHL. Cannulation with the SOC system was successful in 95% but visualization was inadequate in 13%. Primary sclerosing cholangitis was a risk factor for failed cannulation and conscious sedation (vs. general anaesthesia) for inadequate visualization (P<0.05). The accuracy of SOC for diagnosing malignant lesions was 87%. SOC-guided biopsies were adequate in 72%. Obtaining at least four versus less than four biopsy specimens resulted more often in adequate samples (90 vs. 64%, P=0.037). Complete stone clearance could be achieved in 73% of patients. The adverse event rate was 9.6%. Cholangitis was the most common event (56%, one fatal). CONCLUSION: SOC is useful for the differential diagnosis of indeterminate biliary lesions and the treatment of 'difficult' biliary stones. The adequacy of SOC-guided biopsies is related to the number of specimens obtained. Primary sclerosing cholangitis is related to failed cannulation with the SOC system, whereas general anaesthesia is related to adequate visualization.

13 Article Effect of dedicated and supervised training on achieving competence in EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions. 2011

Nayar, Manu / Joy, Diamond / Wadehra, Viney / Oppong, Kofi. ·HPB Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. Manu.Nayar@nuth.nhs.uk ·Scand J Gastroenterol · Pubmed #21623675.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND AIM: The diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has been suggested as a benchmark of quality performance in EUS. However, there is paucity of data on the training requirement for competency in EUS-FNA of the pancreas. KO commenced the service without prior formal training in EUS-FNA. A formally trained colleague (MN) who underwent a fellowship in the same unit was appointed to a substantive post in 2007. The aims of the study were to assess if a dedicated training program in pancreaticobiliary (PB) EUS-FNA of solid lesions: (1) produced better results at the outset of independent practice than produced at the initiation of service without formal training and (2) produced results comparable with those of an experienced endosonographer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review comparing the first 80 consecutive cases at the onset of practice of operator KO1 (2003/2004) and MN (2007/2008) as well as consecutive cases of operator KO2 (2007/2008) in the same time frame as the initial cases of operator MN. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in EUS-FNA sensitivity for pancreatic malignancy between operator KO1 (56%) and operator MN (77%) p < 0.05. There was no significant difference in test performance between operator KO2 (82%) and MN (77%) (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our data show that formal training in PB EUS produces test performance at the outset of independent practice that is comparable with an experienced endosonographer, in line with the published standards for EUS-FNA of the pancreas and significantly better than that achieved without training.

14 Article EUS-FNA versus biliary brushings and assessment of simultaneous performance in jaundiced patients with suspected malignant obstruction. 2010

Oppong, Kofi / Raine, Dan / Nayar, Manu / Wadehra, Viney / Ramakrishnan, Subramaniam / Charnley, Richard M. ·Department of Gastroenterology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. kofi.oppong@nuth.nhs.uk ·JOP · Pubmed #21068487.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT: Individuals with suspected malignant biliary obstruction commonly undergo ERCP for drainage and tissue sampling via biliary brushings. EUS with EUS-FNA facilitates staging and potentially more accurate tissue sampling. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to compare the diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA and ERCP with biliary brushings (ERCP-BB) in the diagnosis of pancreatobiliary carcinoma and the utility of combining the two procedures under conscious sedation. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. PATIENTS: Thirty-seven patients with suspected malignant obstructive jaundice underwent 39 paired procedures, either combined (n=22) or within a few days (n=17). RESULTS: Using strict cytological criteria the sensitivity of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of malignancy was 52.9% (95% CI: 35.1-70.2%) versus 29.4% (95% CI: 15.1-47.5%) for ERCP-BB. Combining the two tests improved sensitivity to 64.7% (95% CI: 46.5-80.3%) which was significantly better than ERCP-BB alone (P=0.001) but not EUS-FNA alone (P=0.125). When both procedures were performed under the same conscious sedation, there was a significant difference (P=0.031) between the sensitivity of EUS-FNA (52.6%; 95% CI: 28.9-75.6%) and that of ERCP-BB (21.1%; 95% CI: 6.1-45.6%). When both procedures were performed together the mean±SD in-room time was 79±14 min (range: 45-105 min). Two of the patients (9.1%) had a complication. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing EUS-FNA and ERCP-BB under the same sedation, EUS-FNA was significantly more sensitive in diagnosing malignancy. Combining the results of both tests improved diagnostic accuracy. Combining therapeutic ERCP and EUS-FNA under the same conscious sedation is feasible, with a complication rate similar to that of ERCP alone.

15 Minor Response. 2013

Dawwas, Muhammad F / Taha, Hatim / Leeds, John S / Nayar, Manu K / Oppong, Kofi W. · ·Gastrointest Endosc · Pubmed #23820414.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --